Re: [PATCH 1/4] powerpc/85xx: Rename PowerPC core nodes to match other e500mc based .dts

2011-10-11 Thread Kumar Gala
On Sep 1, 2011, at 2:26 PM, Kumar Gala wrote: > The P4080 silicon device tree was using PowerPC,4080 while the other > e500mc based SoCs used PowerPC,e500mc. Use the core name to be > consistent going forward. > > Signed-off-by: Kumar Gala > --- > arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p4080si.dtsi | 16

Re: [PATCH 1/4] powerpc/85xx: Rename PowerPC core nodes to match other e500mc based .dts

2011-09-02 Thread Scott Wood
On 09/02/2011 01:29 PM, Kumar Gala wrote: > > On Sep 2, 2011, at 12:52 PM, Scott Wood wrote: > >> On 09/01/2011 10:21 PM, Kumar Gala wrote: >>> >>> On Sep 1, 2011, at 3:42 PM, Scott Wood wrote: Is the "PowerPC" vendor string still appropriate here, or should we use "fsl"? >>> >>> I have

Re: [PATCH 1/4] powerpc/85xx: Rename PowerPC core nodes to match other e500mc based .dts

2011-09-02 Thread Kumar Gala
On Sep 2, 2011, at 12:52 PM, Scott Wood wrote: > On 09/01/2011 10:21 PM, Kumar Gala wrote: >> >> On Sep 1, 2011, at 3:42 PM, Scott Wood wrote: >> >>> On 09/01/2011 02:26 PM, Kumar Gala wrote: The P4080 silicon device tree was using PowerPC,4080 while the other e500mc based SoCs used P

Re: [PATCH 1/4] powerpc/85xx: Rename PowerPC core nodes to match other e500mc based .dts

2011-09-02 Thread Scott Wood
On 09/01/2011 10:21 PM, Kumar Gala wrote: > > On Sep 1, 2011, at 3:42 PM, Scott Wood wrote: > >> On 09/01/2011 02:26 PM, Kumar Gala wrote: >>> The P4080 silicon device tree was using PowerPC,4080 while the other >>> e500mc based SoCs used PowerPC,e500mc. Use the core name to be >>> consistent go

Re: [PATCH 1/4] powerpc/85xx: Rename PowerPC core nodes to match other e500mc based .dts

2011-09-01 Thread Kumar Gala
On Sep 1, 2011, at 5:33 PM, Tabi Timur-B04825 wrote: > On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Kumar Gala wrote: >> The P4080 silicon device tree was using PowerPC,4080 while the other >> e500mc based SoCs used PowerPC,e500mc. Use the core name to be >> consistent going forward. > > Shouldn't we chang

Re: [PATCH 1/4] powerpc/85xx: Rename PowerPC core nodes to match other e500mc based .dts

2011-09-01 Thread Kumar Gala
On Sep 1, 2011, at 3:42 PM, Scott Wood wrote: > On 09/01/2011 02:26 PM, Kumar Gala wrote: >> The P4080 silicon device tree was using PowerPC,4080 while the other >> e500mc based SoCs used PowerPC,e500mc. Use the core name to be >> consistent going forward. > > Why are we not using the generic n

Re: [PATCH 1/4] powerpc/85xx: Rename PowerPC core nodes to match other e500mc based .dts

2011-09-01 Thread Tabi Timur-B04825
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Kumar Gala wrote: > The P4080 silicon device tree was using PowerPC,4080 while the other > e500mc based SoCs used PowerPC,e500mc.  Use the core name to be > consistent going forward. Shouldn't we change the nodes for all e500 based device trees in one shot, instead

Re: [PATCH 1/4] powerpc/85xx: Rename PowerPC core nodes to match other e500mc based .dts

2011-09-01 Thread Tabi Timur-B04825
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Scott Wood wrote: > On 09/01/2011 02:26 PM, Kumar Gala wrote: >> The P4080 silicon device tree was using PowerPC,4080 while the other >> e500mc based SoCs used PowerPC,e500mc.  Use the core name to be >> consistent going forward. > > Why are we not using the generic

Re: [PATCH 1/4] powerpc/85xx: Rename PowerPC core nodes to match other e500mc based .dts

2011-09-01 Thread Scott Wood
On 09/01/2011 02:26 PM, Kumar Gala wrote: > The P4080 silicon device tree was using PowerPC,4080 while the other > e500mc based SoCs used PowerPC,e500mc. Use the core name to be > consistent going forward. Why are we not using the generic names recommendation? Is the "PowerPC" vendor string stil

[PATCH 1/4] powerpc/85xx: Rename PowerPC core nodes to match other e500mc based .dts

2011-09-01 Thread Kumar Gala
The P4080 silicon device tree was using PowerPC,4080 while the other e500mc based SoCs used PowerPC,e500mc. Use the core name to be consistent going forward. Signed-off-by: Kumar Gala --- arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p4080si.dtsi | 16 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-